[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Kerala High Court
Binesh M C vs Shine E A on 14 January, 2026
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
CRL.MC NO. 4592 OF 2024
1
2026:KER:2808
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
WEDNESDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF JANUARY 2026 / 24TH POUSHA, 1947
CRL.MC NO. 4592 OF 2024
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 11.03.2024 IN CRRP NO.18 OF
2020 OF DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT, THRISSUR ARISING OUT
OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 24.01.2020 IN CC NO.892 OF 2016 OF
JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT,IRINJALAKUDA
PETITIONER/COMPLAINANT, REVISION PETITIOINER:
BINESH M C
AGED 51 YEARS
S/O MACHADAM CHANDRAN , TALORE PO , THRISSUR, PIN -
680306
BY ADVS.
SHRI.MANUMON A.
SHRI.REBIN VINCENT GRALAN
SHRI.DINESH G WARRIER
SHRI.SANTHOSH.T.P
SHRI.SURESH C.
SMT.RIA VARGHESE
RESPONDENTS/ACCUSED:
1 SHINE E A
AGED 53 YEARS
S/O APPU , ELAMKALLUR HOUSE , CHITTISSERY PO
,THRISSUR, PIN - 680301
CRL.MC NO. 4592 OF 2024
2
2026:KER:2808
2 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, PIN - 682031
OTHER PRESENT:
SR.PP.SMT.SEETHA S
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
14.01.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
CRL.MC NO. 4592 OF 2024
3
2026:KER:2808
C.S.DIAS.,J
---------------------
Crl.M.C.No.4592 of 2024
---------------------------
Dated this the 14th day of January, 2026
ORDER
The petitioner is the complainant in C.C.No.892/2016
on the file of the Court of Judicial Magistrate of First Class,
Irinjalakuda (for short "Trial Court"), which was filed against the
1st respondent alleging the commission of offence publishable
under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. By
Annexure A1 order, the Trial Court dismissed the complaint on
the ground that the petitioner had not taken steps. Aggrieved
by the said order, the petitioner preferred Criminal
R.P.No.18/2020 before the Court of Sessions, Thrissur (for short
"Revisional Court"). However, by Annexure A3 order, the
Revisional Court also dismissed the revision petition on the
ground that there is no illegality, impropriety or irregularity in
the order passed by the Trial Court. Annexures A1 and A3
orders are ex facie erroneous and unsustainable in law. In fact,
CRL.MC NO. 4592 OF 2024
2026:KER:2808
the petitioner is suffering from Chronic arthritis and he was
advised bed rest. It was in the said circumstances that the
petitioner was precluded from taking steps to effect service of
notice on the 1st respondent. Furthermore, the Trial Court as
well as the Revisional Court have failed to consider that a
complaint is to be decided on merits rather than on
technicalities. The petitioner is willing to pay process to effect
service of notice on the 1st respondent. As a substantial amount
is involved in the complaint, the petitioner may be granted one
last opportunity to contest the complaint on its merits. Hence,
this Crl.MC.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner
and the learned Public Prosecutor. All though service of notice
is completed on the 1st respondent, there is no appearance for
him.
3. Annexure A1 order substantiates that the complaint
was dismissed on the sole ground that the petitioner had failed
to take steps to effect service of notice on the 1 st respondent.
CRL.MC NO. 4592 OF 2024
2026:KER:2808
Although the petitioner assailed the order in revision, the
Revisional Court dismissed the revision petition finding that
there is no error in the Annexure A1 order.
4. Annexure A2 medical certificate substantiates that
the petitioner was indisposed for the period from October, 2019
to March, 2020. Annexure A1 order was passed by the Trial
Court on 24.01.2020, while the petitioner was indisposed.
5. Taking into consideration the peculiar facts and
circumstances of the case, especially the fact that the
petitioner was sick and the complaint was dismissed on default
due to the non payment of process to effect service of notice
on the 1st respondent, I am convinced and satisfied that this is a
fit case to exercise the inherent powers of this Court under
Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and to afford
the petitioner one last opportunity to contest the complaint on
its merits.
In the aforesaid circumstances, I allow this Crl.MC in the
following manner:-
CRL.MC NO. 4592 OF 2024
2026:KER:2808
I) Annexures A1 and A3 orders are quashed.
II) C.C.No.892/2016 on the file of the Judicial
First Class Magistrate Court, Irinjalakkuda is
restored to file.
III) The petitioner shall pay process to affect
service of notice on the 1 st respondent in the
complaint within one week from the date of
receipt of a copy of this order.
IV) The Trial Court is directed to issue notice to
the 1st respondent on the process paid by the
petitioner.
V) Considering the fact that the complaint is
of the year 2016, the Trial Court is directed to
consider and dispose of the complaint, in
accordance with law and as expeditiously as
possible.
Sd/-
C.S.DIAS
JUDGE
bng
CRL.MC NO. 4592 OF 2024
2026:KER:2808
APPENDIX OF CRL.MC NO. 4592 OF 2024
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
ANNEXURE A1 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE ORDER BY THE
HON'BLE JFCM IRINJALAKUDA IN CC 892/2016
DATED 24.01.2020
ANNEXURE A2 THE ORIGINAL MEDICAL CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY
DR. ASHA P. S., TO THE PETITIONER
INSTRUCTING HIM 6 MONTHS BED REST FOR BACK
PAIN DATED 02.10.2019
ANNEXURE A3 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE
HON'BLE SESSIONS COURT, THRISSUR IN CRL
R.P 18/2020 DATED 11.03.2024 .
